Open Source... Television? 200
jarit0z writes: "In Robert Cringely's latest column he toys with the idea of creating a TV show to go along with his rants. The show would be freely (as in beer) distributable, to hopefully keep bandwidth costs down. And it would also be freely (as in speech) modifiable, since he would also be releasing the "source" or raw footage of the show. Very interesting ideas if you ask me."
pbs (Score:5, Interesting)
Could twist his words around (Score:2, Interesting)
With some creative editing, I bet someone could make Bob look like a very big closed source, pro-Microsoft, anti-free software guy, if they wanted to. Or at the very least, make some video that makes him sound a little off his rocker, in an attempt to make people discredit anything else he has to say.
Some folks are producing a feature film this way! (Score:3, Interesting)
The Internet Movie Project [imp.org] has all the rest of the details.
Zed on CBC TV (Score:5, Interesting)
Definitely a step in the right direction. I think you could only see this on public or semi-public (like the CBC) television. Networks out to make money would never dare put anything like this on the air--the airtime is only for the big stars that pull in ratings. Kudos to my home and native land!
Video is something that's VERY different. (Score:4, Interesting)
While its a fine concept, letting the viewer have some control, its only control over some of the parameters of the show not really its content and those parameters are narowly defined by the show's producers.
There's really very little that can be done with raw footage. The creative control comes with the direction and that happens before the cameras are rolling.
It would be more useful to be in on the writer's metings or the story/editorial selection.
Raw footage would only be good for people with access to the technology to cut and splice and produce a segment. (Oh wait. that's anybody with a Mac and iMovie.
Bottom line is, if you don't get to pick WHERE to aim the cam, you don't have much control over the content. If you don't get to pick HOW you aim the cam, you don't have much creative control either.
Try it again cringely.
Not TV but real multimedia (Score:3, Interesting)
Wonder how the MPAA would feel about this one. (Score:3, Interesting)
If the MPAA is suddenly flooded with lots of open media and home grown video with a somewhat open license, would it kill yet another one of their lame excuses?
I'd like to see something like this take off just to see how the open content would fly in an open environment. If open video content takes off like open source has, then the MPAA would not be able to restrict hardware as much as they would like to.
The MPAA would like to see home entertainment as read-only, not only to make it that much harder to copy, but also to eleminate competition from independant producers. Private individuals would demand to have high performance mixing/editing studios in their PCs and home entertainment systems to edit home movies and private projects. Congress would have a harder time shutting down that type of demand. Once the editing capabilities are available, the content protection becomes that much harder to maintain, and that much more obvious to those facing it. It would no longer be a "hacker" problem, but visible to a large percentage of the population.
The TechTV of Community Access (Score:3, Interesting)
Every time I read a story that relates to technology and politics, one discussion thread always floats to the top: "We need to educate the public!"
My suggestion is that the Slashdot community organize and form their own local community access TV shows. A web site should be started that:
1. Gives tips on how to start your CATV show.
2. Tries to form a consistent show format.
3. Discusses show story ideas.
4. Offers on-air graphics for download.
The purpose of this show would be to educate the public about technology and the law. Teach the people how to install an open source OS! Have a call-in section of the show. Discuss the impact of the DMCA and the SSSCA. Discuss the impact of monopolies and intellectual property restrictions. Broadcast clear and direct means of contacting your local politicians. You get the idea...
If a show that looked consistent enough from city to city were to take hold, it could be a significant force in shaping public opinion.
Re:Raw footage? (Score:2, Interesting)
Even with today's technology, your average nightly news could (emphasis 'could') be entirely fabricated.
"raw footage" isn't the "source", it's the script (Score:2, Interesting)
For example, in the world of theatre, you can write a play, and it can be done by any number of people or theatre companies, but the play itself doesn't change. The actors (and location, and props, etc.) are the "hardware" on which the "software" of the play "runs". (Sorry for all those "quotes"!)
You could release a play under the GPL - people would have the right to alter it as they saw fit, as long as their version was modifiable as well.
Of course, the difference is that, with computers, you ideally get identical results with the same software on different hardware, but with the hardware being different people in different places, your play is always going to produce different results. I suppose it would be a better analogy to say that the "software" in the case of theatre accepts variables which can change the outcome.
With TV (or movies), you're just recording an iteration of the software on a given set of hardware and variables.
If it's not a straightforward production with a script, then it's the ideas behind the production that are the software.
Say, for example, that you're a director, and you have this great idea for a sequence of video segments that would be really cool and amazing and everything. You try it out - you get some people together (if required) and film it, and make your little montage or music video or whatever. Your ideas are the software, and you and everything else involved is the hardware. If you don't like the way it runs (the final result), you reconsider your ideas and try again - like fixing bugs or altering features.
Ultimately, if you're going to record an iteration of your software, it's great to make the "raw footage" of that recording "open" to everyone, but you should make your ideas open, as well. Say that anyone can use your idea so long as when anyone else uses your idea to produce something, their production is open as well, and they don't claim the idea as their own...
Well, really I just think scripts should be GPL'd, and this is my reasoning, and this was a convenient article on which to vent about it.
Down with starving actors having to pay royalties to scriptwriters just to put on a production!
"but how do the scriptwriters make money?"
Duh! They act as well! Just like Shakespeare...
I'd rather re-edit my favorite movies (Score:2, Interesting)
Huge communities of EDL trading could spring up, where different editors would cater to any audience (only the action parts? or just the sex scenes? the Memento edit with scenes in reverse order? ever read a review where the critic criticized the overly fast 'MTV style' editing: well now he can slow it down!).
The problem is that the cost of developing all that film would be enormous (notice how missing scenes on SE dvds are sometimes in video, with the running clock at the bottom - they didn't actually process the film in the can, but just took the video from the on-board video camera they have to review shots immediately with), and special effects, CG backdrops or whatever would also be costly to duplicate for scenes that won't even be in theatres (of course, all the easier to make a Jar-Jar free movie if you have the scenes without him composited in).
I don't find most TV shows to be compelling enough that I'd want to re-edit them, but maybe it's a step in the right direction.
Business Model? (Score:4, Interesting)
For years, I've heard many on slashdot and other geek blogs talk about how they would pay for good, free (as in speech) content. Here is some proposed content for the internet, for geeks. I would like to see a really good opportunity for all those geeks (me included!) to put our money where are posts are. If the first season was good, and I enjoyed it, I would give $10 or $20 towards the second season.
And after a few seasons, if this was succesful, it would start to pave the way for other media released using the internet, and perhaps even this business model, maybe books or music or other shows. I think that eventually this could be a great concept to fund OSS development projects. Sooner or later, we're going to have to start the next generation of publishing companies. I envision it being a little like a blog, where you can see what new media is on offer, and what is waiting for funding, contribute to projects you like, and when things are released, they are released to everyone.
Cheers, Joshua